Artisan entrepreneurship makes significant contributions to the economy and society (Al-Dajani et al., 2015; Luckman, 2015) and has thus generated sustained interest from scholars (Bhagavatula et al., 2010; Kuhn and Galloway, 2015), practitioners (Holmes, 2015; Svejenova et al., 2007) and policies makers (Bouette and Magee, 2015; McAuley and Fillis, 2005). Prior research has shown that artisan entrepreneurs find creative ways to discover and exploit opportunities (Bruni and Perrotta, 2014; Ramadani et al., in press), which often involves turning their hobbies and passions into sustainable businesses (Biraglia and Kadile, 2017; Danson et al., 2015). Artisan entrepreneurs also create social value through work in the community and engaging in prosocial business practices (Cater et al., 2017; Pret and Carter, 2017). Numerous studies have highlighted the importance of artisanal products (Barlow et al., in press; Ranganathan, in press; Verhaal et al., 2015) and their impacts on regional competitiveness and tourism development (Ramachandran et al., 2012; Teixeira and Ferreira, in press; Thomas et al., 2013). At the same time, research has shown that the motives and goals of artisan entrepreneurs are diverse (Fillis, 2004; Tregear, 2005) and that their practices can vary significantly depending on the contexts in which they are embedded (Drakopoulou Dodd et al., in press; Pret et al., 2016). As such, it is important to delineate the existing body of research. To date, there is no comprehensive overview of the literature on the subject. This study therefore seeks to advance knowledge by systematically reviewing and critiquing research into artisan entrepreneurship. In order to facilitate this exploration, it is important to first position the reviewed literature within its knowledge domain and provide definitions. Research into the practices and products of artisan entrepreneurs is situated within the field of cultural entrepreneurship ( Johnson, 2007; Jones et al., 2016; Ratten and Ferreira, 2017). As the study of culture and its role in business activities continues to gain popularity (Chua et al., 2015; Dalpiaz et al., 2016; Lounsbury and Glynn, 2001), it has resulted in a rich variety of theoretical perspectives (Gehman and Soublière, 2017; Giorgi et al., 2015). It has been argued that Swedberg’s (2006, p. 260) perspective, which defines cultural entrepreneurship as “the carrying out of a novel combination that results in something new and appreciated in the cultural sphere”, is most applicable to artisan entrepreneurship research (Pret, 2017). This “making culture” approach originates in DiMaggio’s (1982) work, which focuses on the production and distribution of cultural products. Cultural products, in turn, are defined as goods “directed at a public of consumers, for whom they generally serve an aesthetic or expressive, rather than a clearly utilitarian function” (Hirsch, 1972, pp. 641-642). Creating and selling such products lies at the core of both craft and artisan entrepreneurship (Tregear, 2005). Importantly, given that many studies use these terms interchangeably (e.g. Blundel, 2002; Bouette and Magee, 2015; Kuhn and Galloway, 2015), this review of the literature does not differentiate between them, but rather employs artisan entrepreneurship as an overarching label to refer to both.